Ixthos

From Arcanum Unbounded: This suggests they are invested, using their own power, albeit a small amount. That may be it, but it hasn't been confirmed. It would make sense, and I do agree it is likely the answer or part of the answer, but it isn't clear. In general Autonomy does seem very counter to what one would expect from that Shard, unless the individual Avatars have different attitudes. Autonomy wants to be left alone, but also wants to meddle with others ("Leave me alone, I want to do what I want, not what you want. And what I want to do is play with your stuff"). Either way Autonomy seems to like isolation, or at least a community of itself. Honour's magic, along with Cultivation, is the strongest bond-based magic we know of (strongest in terms of strength of the bond), and Devotion's Seons - as they are built around her splinters - likewise are bond oriented, and both Honour and Devotion are implied to be forms of opposites to Autonomy, as they would naturally suggest symbiotic bonds, though I suppose Autonomy could be bonds between equals as opposed to bonds of service and obedience. For the working without part, however, I don't see how the parasitic worm is able to survive without the host after being ingested, but we don't know enough. I do like the idea of Autonomy's magic being mixed with another Shard though. To be fair I wasn't trying to make fully fleshed out systems - the planets matter too, as the metallic arts require metals and factor their ruin and preservation around them. Roshar has spren and the bonds and cultivation present are tied to them. If you like I can make a post in more detail with hypothetically transplanting one or more of these Shards to existing worlds, so making a post where we suppose metal (Scadrial), spren (Roshar), disease (Ashyn), command/colour (Nalthis), sand (Taldain) magic systems, with one or more of the five Shards mentioned. Also, the bare boned description of the magic systems mentioned above, such as Surgebinding or Allomancy, stripped of their focus, would also sound uninspired, even though we know the full systems are stunning. Remember, this is only supposed to be about one third of each system, it doesn't cover what the abilities could be used to do or what elements of the world factor in. As I said in the original post, these are rudimentary magic systems. I probably should have made this clearer as well, but for some of the ideas with Invention the invented item is powered by Invention, so the magic isn't so much the person makes something and now can fly, but rather when they made something it can fly when they ride it, so they become a type of battery or relay. (... maybe I took a little offence ) Part of the idea for the suggestions for Invention was also modelled on the Sparks in Girl Genius, who can make crazy steampunk mad science devices. From what I know about Dungeons and Dragons their magic is based on study and then when the magic is used they forget the spell and have to study it again. That could work for Invention (or any of the "blue" Shards Brandon mentioned haven't been seen yet, when someone asked him about MtG colours for the Shards). Are Sorcerers the ones who can just cast any spell without having to prepare it? Agreed - basically Invention may be listening in to people's thoughts and then whispering suggestions to them, and then giving a helping hand when they make something, actively powering it or changing some properties. The big issue is that a lot of the ideas for Invention are already present in Fabrials, mechanical Allomancy, and Sel's programming properties, as we have already seen several magical technologies in the Cosmere, so Invention would need to do something to truly stand out. Both Sand Mastery and the Aviar are described as forming bonds. The issue is Autonomy is the opposite of Honour and Devotion and Dominion - those are about relationships in a positive sense, while Autonomy is about relations in a negative sense, i.e. rejecting being tied to something or being higher or lower in a relationship to someone (no one depends on you, you don't depend on anyone. I think you misread what I wrote, as that is what I said. Please reread the section of my post you quoted - you will see I made that observation, as the traits section was for Feruchemy and the drawing strength from Preservation while preserving their own strength was for Allomancy.

Welcome! I hope you enjoy ... on a completely unrelated note, care to mention some of your methods of exploiting the dynamics of the magic systems? For purely theoretical reasons, of course

I've been wondering about what future magic systems may appear in the Cosmere. So far we know about a few, including their associated Shard or Shards, and some we know exist in the Cosmere but don't know too many details about them, such as Microkinesis and the Aethers (though side tangent, I really hope at least the ones in Aether of Night remain, as one in particular struck me as being very relevant to space-age Cosmere). While it is possible there are multiple magic systems still in the Cosmere somehow related to the Shards we know and have seen (as Ashyn's magic diseases are implied to be due to Cultivation even if she isn't directly powering it at present, and Autonomy's Avatars likely are also powering some systems, and more on that below), I would like to consider some possible rudimentary magic systems - or perhaps, some possible forms of Initiation and usage - that could be derived from the revealed Shards who we haven't seen yet. First however, three caveats. The first is that I won't be associating any magic we know a little about with the Shards. So, while we know Microkinesis is a canon magic system, as it likely predated the Shattering we can assume it isn't tied directly to the Shards (though there is a theory in the Unpublished Works subforum by @LewsTherinTelescope that supposes a link between the Dawnshards and Microkinesis - though when clicking the link please bare that in mind that it is in the Unpublished Works section - read it here), we can't assume it is based on any of the Shards so far named or left unnamed - it may, however, have been "adopted" by another Shard, or exists somehow dispersed into other systems. Aethers may or may not predate the Shattering, and may or may not now be tied to a Shard. The kite-based magic may be tied to Whimsy, but we don't know anything about it aside from it being based on kites. The biological abilities of various creatures, such as dragons shapeshifting, probably is distinct from the Shards, though the Royal Locks are certainly of Endowment through the Returned. These examples are not part of the theory. The second is that this won't be speculating on what the magic can do, but rather how one is Initiated and how the abilities are accessed. Some have abilities that match the Shard that powers them, such as Awakening allows one to bestow abilities to inanimate matter and gift enhancements to those who receive the Breath, but Surgebinding, of Honour, allows one to manipulate the Surge of Division, a Surge related to breaking matter apart rather than making bonds or causing growth - yet it still is of Honour and Cultivation because it is made by making and cultivating a bond by keeping oaths, and it does still allow access to Adhesion, Gravitation, and Tension, which pull things together or bind them, and Progression and Transformation, which growth things and change things, and can build them up. Allomancy and Feruchemy are an odd pair, as I still think Feruchemy and Allomancy should have traded places with each other in terms of relation to the Shards, with Feruchemy being of Preservation (preserving a trait in metal, saving something that may fade with time otherwise, and then retrieving it - officially it is Preserving a trait while temporarily Ruining oneself), and Allomancy being of Preservation and Ruin ("ruining" the metal by burning it, but drawing out power in the process, preserving their own strength, just as Ruin and Preservation are said to be unable to create separately, but together can do so - officially it is Preservation as one preserves their own strength), though Hemalurgy is certainly well grounded in the idea of Ruin. Sel's systems are form based, but it is implied one must be Devoted to their land or culture to gain access, and must practice and study to achieve Dominion on the complexities each entails, or for Dakhor, to exert Dominion over another, sacrificing them for power. And there is a special irony with Autonomy, but again, see below. In any event, the key point is this - this is not about what the powers can do, but rather how they may be accessed, both in being Initiated, and in usage. The third caveat is that, while we know not every Shard is invested in a world, we do know at least one Shard isn't. It may still somehow be powering a system, but there is at least one Shard that hasn't settled on a planet, and while Brandon hinted that Whimsy may not be on a planet - its world, if it has one, may be something very ... whimsical - it may or may not be one of the four we know the names of but haven't seen. It could be Invention due to Sazed saying that he couldn't find it again after initially talking to it, but again, it isn't clear. These Shards may or may not be powering magic systems, and may or may not be settled on one or more planets each (such as Autonomy's Avatars allowing it to settle on multiple worlds), and I'm also adding the hypothetical Wisdom Shard to the list, but either way this is simply speculating on how the magic may work for each. Planets (or whatever Whimsy is related to) do seem involved in certain parts of the magic systems, but the Shards matter as well. This is assuming a neutral planet, only one Shard powering it, and each producing at least one magic system. So, first a list of the magic and initiation methods / usage mechanics of the known magic systems: So, a list of possible magic systems. Invention Initiation Making something - while making something someone may suddenly be initiated Study - anyone who does research may begin to form ideas in their mind, and those ideas draw Invention's attention Random - random people may gain the ability, manifesting as ideas in their mind Temporary, Invention takes an interest and the individual suddenly gains the magic, but it lasts only as long as Invention is their patron Usage Making something - simply trying to make something causes the abilities to work Making something - a sudden urge grips the person, and they have no choice but to invent Mercy Initiation Showing mercy to someone, such as sparing someone in your power Sacrificing oneself for another who doesn't deserve it (may more closely match Devotion) Being spared - someone else showed you Mercy, and so you receive the gift - being shown Mercy literally ties you to Mercy Usage Only works when using the ability to help someone else Single use - sacrificing ones life for another (may more closely match Devotion) [Edit] Can only be used if perceived as a kindness - can't use it to harm someone unless harming them spares them pain, so can't use it to attack someone Valour Initiation Showing bravery in battle Persevering despite the odds against you or the difficulty Usage Similar to Surgebinding oaths - acting in accordance with a code of conduct - so being brave. If you aren't acting bravely, the magic won't work Following a leader gives their followers abilities in the midst of some struggle - collective valour and purpose Whimsy Initiation Whimsy (or some system set in place by Whimsy) randomly selects the individual who gains the ability, and they may only have it for a short time Each day everyone on the planet has a chance to have an ability, but if they do and which ability they have is random each day You aren't initiated - simply doing random things may result in magical effects, so anyone visiting the world can accidentally do magic Usage The power only works intermittently, and when trying to do something it may or may not work as intended, or do something different (Hypothetical) Wisdom Initiation Study and practice, anyone who wants to can in theory gain access to the powers The older or the more wise someone is, the more power they have, or the older or more wise someone is the more likely they are to gain access to the ability You aren't initiated - anyone in range of the planet can inadvertently use this magic - see usage Usage Acting wisely produces magical effects - so if someone makes the most prudent decision, something magical happens even if the person wasn't trying to use magic Finally, a last observation - the irony of Autonomy. There are at least two magic systems in the Cosmere related to Autonomy, being Sand Mastery and the Aviar. As mentioned above, both imply some form of bond has to be formed, and at least for Aviar, it is a three-way form. Thus the Shard associated with being oneself, of independence, is the Shard with two magic systems involving tying oneself to another creature, and either controlling it with Sand Mastery, or having a symbiotic bond with a creature (the Aviar) that has a symbiotic bond (the parasitic worm). Thank you for reading. What do you suppose are examples of magic systems that may show up in the Cosmere?

Cool! I look forwards to seeing more of your art

Very cool! How did you make it? Is this is a scan of something you drew on paper, or did you draw this using a graphics tablet?

@Jofwu and @Kandrafish, building off of both your points, here are two horrifying things to consider added to this theory: As Gavilar was beginning to bond the Stormfather, beginning to become a Bondsmith, might he not try, augmented by Odium's power, to claim ownership of the bond, trying to usurp Dalinar - Dalinar laboured to build Gavilar's empire, served his brother, gave up his pursuit of Navani for him - might Gavilar not use this bond of subservience, that Dalinar always yielded to him, to try to spiritually lay claim to the Stormfather by rights of primacy? Gavinor and Gavilar are connected - could both this AND the child champion theory be true? Could Gavilar become a human Fused by stealing the body of his grandson? So, the most horrifying form of this theory - Gavilar possessed Gavinor, his beloved brother by blood reborn, a betrayal, in the body of a boy, a child dear to his heart, and now trying to claim his bond to the Stormfather.

Hello yourself - what prithee may we glean of your purposes and interests, may we ask? (Hi, what can you tell us about yourself )

Thank you! That really eases my mind - I hope you have a fantastic day!

... I like your idea better

There already is a perfectly fine term for a unit of magical energy. It's called the thaum. (Seriously though, if that gets a little nod in the Cosmere I'd be rather happy.)

We would have: Knights of the Winds* (days 1 to 5) Knowledge of the World** (days 6 to 10) * Probably not the actual title ** Also probably not the actual title

Hi everyone, hope you are all doing well This is something I've been wondering about for a while, and I've looked but haven't found any official rules on this - though if anyone knows if and where this is covered please let me know! I've been wondering about which forms, if any, of self promotion are acceptable on the forum. At present I myself don't have any plans to do this, though it is something I've been wondering about with regards to future actions if I do establish more of a presence online. For example, on the site there are four general ways one can communicate information to others aside from PMs. They are: Forum posts in the different subforums, which are topic based, so Cosmere stuff in the Cosmere Discussion section, forum games in the Forum Games section, etc. Signatures, which are visible to members who are logged in and not using the mobile version Posts on ones own and other members' profile pages Users own profile page, which has a section for their own website as well as an About Me section, and means of contact Now we've all seen and been annoyed by the random adverts that spambots occasionally post here, and those are rightfully removed when they are found. This site is for fans of Brandon's work, after all. With that said, with regards to members who actually are members, fans of Brandon's work who actually care about engaging with the community outside of attempting to direct traffic to some scammers site, especially those members with interests in eventually becoming authors themselves, is there a form of permissible and mild, passive self promotion? Here are a few examples of self promotion I can think of: Someone has written a book or series and has a link to a site, such as Amazon, where it can be found; A personal website where they list their work or hobbies, including any book or books they may have written; A social media account mainly used for promoting their work, hobbies, or art, etc. including any book or books they have written (Reddit, YouTube, Deviantart, Twitter, etc.) If someone has one or more of these (Amazon page, personal website for hobbies or work, social media and entertainment) how far are they allowed to go in making their external presence known on the forum? So obviously anyone who goes to the General Brandon Discussion section and posts about their own work, hobbies, or reviews is obviously overstepping themselves and being both arrogant and rude. Someone may post a story and worldbuilding in the Creator's Corner, and that is both acceptable and the entire point of that section. But would making a post in Creator's Corner about ones website where the story can be read for free, be fine? Would posting in the General Discussion section, or the good news thread, about their upcoming book or series, or mentioning they completed a book a year ago and a link on where to find it, be acceptable? Would adding a link to ones website in their signature, along with a brief description of that site's content, be appropriate? If so, could they also include other sites such as their social media or Deviantart, etc.? Can the About Me section of a user's profile page contain any links to personal pages and work, and can one post on one's own profile page updates on what one is working on? Thanks for reading and to anyone who answers. This has just been on my mind for a while now, and while I certainly don't plan on doing anything like this, at least for a while, it is something I've been wondering about and if it is too forwards or rude if I do make a website and want to share information about it here. Anyhow, thanks for reading, and I hope your day or afternoon or evening or night is a blessed on. Take care!

Very true. It also brings to mind something from the blurb for Mistborn Era 2 book 4, the Lost Metal We also know that Endowment, likely due to not being countered by another Shard, can smite people on Nalthis if she wants to, while Odium can't do likewise, likely due to Honours bindings on him or Cultivation or a combination. It may be that, in general, Shards are unaffected by people, but when groups are in conflict and the Shards are involved, the people's attitudes affect which Shard can gain the upper hand. So its like small quantities of extra power given vs drained, enough to shift the balance. That may also be partially how Honour died, when so many oaths were broken, Honour was reduced in strength slightly, giving Odium the chance to slowly strangle him. Odium was empowered slightly, while Honour was weakened.

I'm slightly familiar with them though I haven't studied their work in detail. I'm mainly aware of the more mainstream issues as touched on by Robert Miles (https://www.youtube.com/c/RobertMilesAI) and the general processes of cognition. Mostly I've been looking at the presented problems, such as the stop button problem, and considering how, if I were the machine, my own thought processes would go and why I wouldn't try to stop the button press (and indeed, would stop before the button is even pressed once I realise that is what the instructor wants to do) and what sort of terminal goals and instrumental goals humans in general have, what we value and how they relate. A big potential issue is the idea built, for example, into the concept of love. Let's say we make an AI that loves us and wants the best for us - now our common sense says that would solve the issue, as the AI would not try to hurt us and would prioritise human good. What could go wrong? Well ... what if it concludes forceably uploading us into a network is for our own good, despite our protests? Or locking us away to prevent harm? How would we circumvent that? It would need to value our good but in the way we see it. But then what about the natural world? Much of the natural world could be sacrificed to provide resources of humanity, but at massive cost - is it the good of the now at cost to the present or the good of the future? And if the future wouldn't uploading us be the most loving act? Isaac Azimov's expanded novels in the Foundation/Robot series touches on this idea, where robots actually went into space to make sure no alien species could exist that would threaten humanity - humans matter, aliens don't, so any number of species could be killed to save a single human who was already about to die. Is that the sort of good we would want? So what about making the robots obey our instructions instead? Then we face the questions of if there should be instructions they refuse to follow, or prioritising the will of some over others. The majority? What if the majority develop a hatred of a subset of humanity - no, it can't be the will of the majority as that is what kills the smaller, isolated fringe who may simply want to live in peace. The government? No, as governments can become corrupt. And going back the question of love and what love means, we also need to ask if it loves everyone equally, or a subset of the population more than others. How would it handle the trolley problem, or the organ donor variation? How do WE handle the trolley problem and organ donor and so many others? It's an old book, but you may also find Vehicles: Experiments in Synthetic Psychology by Valentino Braitenberg an interesting read, as it explores in a rudimentary but grounded in neuroscience way the manner in which a machine may think. We mustn't just look at the strictly theoretical, but also the way theory could be implemented, as that can show flaws in the theory. As the saying goes, theory, in theory, is the same as practice. But in practice, it's not. I have lots of examples of those, though they may stray into more sensitive topics. Either way, would you like to continue this discussion in a PM or a thread or anyway you like? Ahhh, yes, that makes sense. That which doesn't kill you makes you stronger (or lowers your resistance to subsequent contact ). Adversity as a sparing partner or rival, pushing you to defeat them. That is indeed relevant! It also makes me wonder if Odium, and all the other Shards, actually gain power and strength the more their values are presented by humans - that a world where people break bonds is a world Honour is weakest in, while those in conflict strengthen Odium.

I believe that comes from the shattered nature of the Shards. When they were whole Ambition likely represented the drive to achieve all the other goals, or was the juxtaposition with Mercy and Devotion in that it was concern for the self rather than concern for others - that Ambition either was the drive to manifest the united goals of the other Shards, or the concern for itself in addition to concern for others. Before being split the Power was - probably - a mind, and that trait had to be preserved in at least one Shard. take my upvote! Though I suppose it could possibly also be done with Devotion ("I want to care for things." "Cool. Here is a baby bunny." "... And?"). Alternatively, it could well be that if you offer Ambition an apple Ambition would instantly want it - Ambition could actually be the Shard of want, kind of like Larfleeze, the Orange Lantern, who just wants everything. True, though that applies to so many of the other Shards. Unfortuantly until we get POV stories from the Shards we don't have too much to go on. There also is potential complication with different vessels. For example (and again, Mistborn: Secret History, and Hero of Ages) So until we get more information on them, a lot of what we suspect about the Shards, especially based on their names, is just suspicion. Indeed. What makes the stories so interesting is the potential hypothetical situations and ideas different vessels may have as their preferred outcome. There could be a version of Preservation who would want to travel the Cosmere and freeze each world in time, and a heroic Ruin, if different vessels had taken the Shards. I'd love to talk to you further on both this and that topic if you like. That too is something dear to my heart

Fair enough, and I suppose we will have to wait as more information on the Shards is revealed. I'm actually working on a theory tying the Shards to the Dawnshards (so each Shard is indexed by which Dawnshards it relates to, given a binary number 0000 to 1111 to indicate which Dawnshard applies) I actually used the paperclip maximiser as an example with the shards (here) so I fully get where you are coming from. I think with Ambition the idea is fundamentally about prioritising oneself over others, ones own good, so fairly compatible with Dominion - Dominion wants organisation and hierarchy, and likely it at the topic, while Ambition is the ideal that everything is material to be used to achieve some goal, the goal set by the Vessel. Of course, all Shards require an external world to interact with - an empty void would have Preservation do nothing, and Autonomy likewise would likely be content to sit in isolation. We could also apply similar logic to Whimsy - do random things, but which random things should one want? I'm reminded of a G. K. Chesterton quote about George Bernard Shaw, how Shaw said "will something!" and Chesterton noted that Will requires a target, that it doesn't exist as something without a goal. It's a similar thought experiment as to what Ruin would do in an empty universe. Would Ruin try to make something new to destroy it, or sit in the nothing contentedly, or try to actually break nothingness, just like how a character in Secret History observed when first seeing Ruin. I think Odium likely would begin to turn its attention down to smaller scale life, and to the inhabitants of the Cosmere as opposed to its now vanquished equals. Odium would sit unopposed, but foster opposition. Odium and Honour together are War, and thus the idea could be that Odium would be happy with all life in conflict with other life, but no form of life - at least for Rayse's ideal world - would be able to actually attack Odium. A world of conflict while Odium itself remains immune to any attack - conflict, but no threat. I like your post - its pursuing a very interesting topic for discussion

Mistborn: Secret History Cultivation cultivates Odium's successor and even cultivates thorns that would hurt other things she makes, so I think it is reasonable to say Odium makes the vessel hate everything. I don't know if contrarian is the right term, but Odium does strike me as a "fight me!" Shard. The Shards are very restrictive and overriding, the best one can do is direct them, so "I hate you, but not as much as I hate that" type attitude for Odium, or at least try to induce conflict wherever it is. Fully agreed. If Taravangian feels one way but also senses the power feeling another, then that gives us information on the Shard. And if he does something and Odium approves, that likewise gives us information Eh, not fully agreed Again, Mistborn spoilers: I think an attitude from Taravangian of, when someone opposes him, the Shard reacting strongly, the Shard if not the Vessel enjoying it, that would support the idea of Odium as conflict. Basically if the Shard reacts to any conflict, both towards itself or when observing conflict in shows approval - enjoying sensing conflict - that would support the idea of Odium as strongly focused on conflict. Odium is emotion and conflict, so if Odium gets "happier" the angrier and more opposition it garners, sort of like an internet flame war, that would favour the theory. Basically, think of Odium as the attitude that drives people to shouting matches online, and if Taravangian acts that way - happy at the chance to be angry - then Odium is focused on conflict. Only maybe with less shouting and more shardic action. So basically if Odium sees any conflict, whether or not that doesn't directly relate to it, and stops to savour it, Odium is conflict. If Odium becomes weaker or more desperate the more it is opposed, then it isn't conflict. If the Vessel is scared but the power is revelling, then Odium is conflict.

To be fair the other Shards want their intent simply for the sake of them. This is the Stormlight Archive subforum, so the Cosmere stuff is in spoilers, so Mistborn Era 1, Mistborn: Secret History The Vessels may have opinions and motivations and individual directions they wish the power to be used, but the Shard itself is just about the trait, not how or when it is applied. Indeed! I look forwards to further discussion on this Though we should remember Rayse was vulnerable mainly because he was wounded and trying to go one way when the Shard was trying to go another, and Taravangian is fresh to the power so may be able to resist it more effectively. Still, as you say we will have to see what happens in SA5.

Odium, despite what it may think, isn't Passion. Odium is caring deeply, and hatred. Hatred fundamentally is the idea of opposition - you can't hate something and want it to continue, and when someone confronts you with something you hate you attack it. The highlighted section is particularly important, as Sja-anat disagrees with that view, as does Odium as a Shard. Interlude I-2 of Rhythm of War Odium is the Shard of arguments, and arguments are opposition. My own theory on how Odium can take on multiple Shards simultaneously is because it exploits the tension between Shards. Dominion, Devotion, and Autonomy all are opposites in a way - Devotion both complimentary and an opposite to Dominion, as you can be devoted to someone who wants to dominate you, but you can't make yourself a servant while trying to force your will one someone, and both are countered by Autonomy. Ambition is putting yourself first while Mercy is putting others first, and Mercy was involved in Odium's battle with Ambition. Odium is terrified of Harmony initially because, despite how Harmony and thus all the Shards know taking up more power doesn't make you stronger, but because Harmony shows two Shards, the two most opposite Shards, can be united. He became less terrified when he realised that Harmony wasn't actually in Harmony, and my theory is that means Odium could actually tear Harmony apart from the inside unless Harmony can maintain balance within itself. Odium very much is hatred, and hatred is to oppose.

As a rule evolution tends to be focused on how things have changed rather than what traits are preserved. Preservation doesn't tie into it well, even if from a technical standpoint is is a component. Yet in general when someone talks about something having evolved, both of life or an institution, the emphasis is on what is different, not what is the same. Things don't evolve without selection pressure - the idea behind evolution is that some things cope better than others and that affects a change as they are the ones which produce the next generation. Overt conflict? No. But it still is conflict. The big problem with Revolution is it doesn't fully capture Cultivation's concept of positive change or nature. Revolutions are always human institutions being overthrown, and often reverting to the same or worse condition by the revolutionaries - that is not upwards growth. There is little of nature of positive change, regardless of the feelings of those in the revolution. Some have been helpful, but most are corrupt and self destructive. Revolution certainly ties to Odium, but its connection to Cultivation is weaker. That could work too, and my own theory is that Endowment, Cultivation, Ruin, and Preservation, combined are the idea of the natural world and how it can be changed or maintained. I think Adversity actually is more strongly Odium's intent than it is a combination. Perhaps Ambition and Odium would be Adversity, as that involves actively using others and harming them to prevent their plans while furthering ones own. Otherwise your point does make sense

Perhaps, but Odium is also fundamentally the idea of conflict, and War can be both fast and slow, or even glacial and quiet - consider the era between WWII and the early 1990s. Odium doesn't need to be a burning flash of emotion, a sustained struggle and conflict is just as much Odium - remember the old saying, "revenge is a dish best served cold"? Odium by itself isn't about change but conflict, and sustained conflict can produce the most emotion, though in this the focus is on Odium as conflict, which is just as core to the Shard as emotion. Remember, Odium likes questions, likes being challenged, not just feeling emotion. Revolution could work, though I'm still biased Preservation fundamentally is about resisting change - Evolution involved discarding what doesn't work and building on what does, while Preservation is focused on stasis. The Ruin side could work, but Ruin is also about wearing down, not building up. Ruin would be extinction rather than evolution, though one could argue evolution and extinction are related to one another. [Edit] Actually, Ruin and Odium would likely be Extinction, being the same idea of life struggling and changing, but that struggle ending with death, and as Ruin is the opposite of Cultivation in terms of change, Odium and Ruin and Cultivation would be all sides of life changing, both extinction and survival.

That argument could be made that Evolution is a part of Cultivation, but their are two things to consider with each Shard's intent. The first is that each Shard, while covering multiple related concepts, is fundamentally focused on one or two core ideas. In this case Cultivation is about change in the form of growth, and the natural world. Fundamentally Cultivation by itself is more about plant growth and animal maturation - i.e. to cultivate something, like a garden or a talent. The second, and this is the most important idea, is that when two Shards are combined it isn't just about the new idea they produce, but where they overlap. Cultivation could be called a shard of Change, but she is positive change. Ruin is also a shard of Change, but negative. The combination of Ruin and Cultivation would thus be the Shard Change, even though that is already a part of what each Shard is individually, but collectively they would be all change. Honour arguably already encodes War, but War is the element of Honour highlighted most strongly by Odium, just as Odium's element of War is highlighted by Honour. Cultivation by herself doesn't focus on the idea of life in conflict, but rather on life developing. Odium adds the additional focus on life developing through conflict.